What to do about London-Chester

[Philip]

It seems clear that Avanti don't consider Chester (and North Wales) as one of their more important destinations, at least not from London, and this is evidenced in the service as it was before the pandemic still not being reinstated. I don't think it is surprising; Chester is arguable in having a London market strong enough to warrant a fast and regular service there - and even more arguable for North Wales. Is it worth reinstating the hourly Chester-London to how it was or would it be more worthwhile removing the service permanently and creating an extra free path?

Would a compromise be a better idea? I'm thinking of the London-Birmingham-Scotland service running as a portion train as far as Crewe, with coaches then splitting for Scotland and Chester/North Wales. This would preserve the extra free path whilst still reinstating the 'direct' service - and Chester passengers wanting a quicker journey could change at Crewe onto a train via the Trent Valley. The extra time spent at Crewe for splitting/joining could be made up by removing the long dwell at Wolverhampton.

 

[JonathanH]

Chester's problem is that it isn't electrified and it is served by trains that are a) short and b) diesel. If there are limited resources to run the service, it makes sense to run the trains with the most capacity that are the most efficient.

That translates to not running an hourly service to Chester because other routes are prioritised.

Avanti don't really have sensible rolling stock to undertake portion working of Scottish and Chester services so your idea is a bit of a non starter.

Avanti have ordered 805s against there being a service to Chester and North Wales. Unless they are diverted elsewhere I imagine there might one day be restoration of a more regular service to Chester.

 

[The Planner]

It seems clear that Avanti don't consider Chester (and North Wales) as one of their more important destinations, at least not from London, and this is evidenced in the service as it was before the pandemic still not being reinstated. I don't think it is surprising; Chester is arguable in having a London market strong enough to warrant a fast and regular service there - and even more arguable for North Wales. Is it worth reinstating the hourly Chester-London to how it was or would it be more worthwhile removing the service permanently and creating an extra free path?

Would a compromise be a better idea? I'm thinking of the London-Birmingham-Scotland service running as a portion train as far as Crewe, with coaches then splitting for Scotland and Chester/North Wales. This would preserve the extra free path whilst still reinstating the 'direct' service - and Chester passengers wanting a quicker journey could change at Crewe onto a train via the Trent Valley. The extra time spent at Crewe for splitting/joining could be made up by removing the long dwell at Wolverhampton.

The long dwell is only in one direction and as @JonathanH has noted, what stock would it be considering they are losing the 221s?

 

[Peter0124]

I suppose they could portion work the Scotland using 805s and stable them at Polmadie (thus allowing a diversionary route via G&SW). Though only one or two services a day maximum.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It seems clear that Avanti don't consider Chester (and North Wales) as one of their more important destinations, at least not from London, and this is evidenced in the service as it was before the pandemic still not being reinstated. I don't think it is surprising; Chester is arguable in having a London market strong enough to warrant a fast and regular service there - and even more arguable for North Wales. Is it worth reinstating the hourly Chester-London to how it was or would it be more worthwhile removing the service permanently and creating an extra free path?

I would personally see it as having more value to run an hourly Holyhead-Crewe semifast* timed to connect in both directions with another Avanti service at Crewe than run the bitty Coast line service. It would also allow the messy timetable up there to be sorted out.

* not Shotton, Abergele, Conwy, Llanfairfechan, Penmaenmawr nor any of the Anglesey request stops.

I suppose they could portion work the Scotland using 805s (thus allowing a diversionary route via G&SW). Though only one or two services a day maximum.

Demand to Scotland is too high to run short trains there. The old 5-car Brum-Scotland had a worse overcrowding problem than most of XC, and the extended Brum with 11 car Pendolinos was a genius way of sorting it out, as well as an opportunity to offer cheaper Advances for a slower journey and so differentiate the market.

 

[Peter0124]

Demand to Scotland is too high to run short trains there.

9M53 1000 Glasgow to Euston used to run throughout as a 5 car voyager, so did the 9S65 1143 Euston to Glasgow.

 

[Bletchleyite]

9M53 1000 Glasgow to Euston used to run throughout as a 5 car voyager, so did the 9S65 1143 Euston to Glasgow.

I suppose the railway is at its quietest in the middle of a weekday, but that's also the sort of token Chester service that's not worth doing.

The main demands for North Wales to/from London will be:

1. Work trips out, morning out early evening back.
2. Saturday day trips to London as per 1 but on a Saturday. Many of these will use LNR from Crewe as it's so cheap.
3. From London to North Wales Friday PM, back Sunday PM for a weekend in the mountains/on the coast.

Those are most of the times when it wouldn't be OK to run single Voyagers to Scotland.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

...Chester is arguable in having a London market strong enough to warrant a fast and regular service there - and even more arguable for North Wales.

Really? Who says?

 

[cle]

The Chester service is much loved and valued for many reasons in the community - the city but also North Wales and the Wirral. It also enabled another fast London-Crewe and a MKC-Crewe fast also. Chester has grown as an economy and as a rail hub because of it.

It hit 5m passengers just before for pandemic. For context, that is slightly more than Preston - and more than Warrington BQ, Wigan NW, and Blackpool North combined. Or any of those towns' stations combined. It's a fairly important place on the network, and shows what 'build it and they will come' can do. Degrading the service will kill the demand - and then they can justify killing it entirely.

Alternatively, reinstate it while domestic leisure travel is booming (Chester is a great destination; history, shopping, entertainment, races etc) and see it thrive.

Chester also before the pandemic saw other rail connectivity growth. The Calder Valley/Leeds service began (with a fastest Warrington & Manchester link), the Halton Liverpool is doing well, even an extra Stockport via Northwich added some local connectivity. The Halton will in time see hourly Shrewsbury, hourly Llandudno (subbing Manchester-Bangor, the Bangor segment being the real new service) and two hourly Cardiff. So we can expect its importance to continue.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It's worth bearing in mind that the Chester provided another, often cheaper option for connecting from much of Merseyrail, particularly to MKC. It will be interesting to see how the second Liverpool affects that.

I would say the North West WCML stations only get the high level of London service they do because it's operationally convenient, in particular Preston is a crew change location. Coventry is similar.

 

[Hadders]

Realistically no-one's going to travel on a London-Birmingham-Chester service to get to Chester.

Avanti should reinstate direct trains asap but given they're in meltdown at the moment I guess it's the easiest service to pull from the timetable.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Realistically no-one's going to travel on a London-Birmingham-Chester service to get to Chester.

Avanti should reinstate direct trains asap but given they're in meltdown at the moment I guess it's the easiest service to pull from the timetable.

It'd also help economically, as if they pulled it (and the occasional Shrewsbury extension) completely for now they could have all the Voyagers go off lease.

 

[The Planner]

I suppose they could portion work the Scotland using 805s and stable them at Polmadie (thus allowing a diversionary route via G&SW). Though only one or two services a day maximum.

Somewhere loses out if you do that as there won't be enough 805s.

 

[Huntergreed]

I suppose they could portion work the Scotland using 805s and stable them at Polmadie (thus allowing a diversionary route via G&SW). Though only one or two services a day maximum.

I would support this IF they were able to (even partially) reinstate the Euston to Glasgow via Birmingham services (if my understanding is correct, these STILL are not returning in December?)

A couple of 805’s up there a day using this route is much better than none at all, but the main issue with this would obviously be where to get the spare 805’s from as this would inevitably take away from other services.

 

[Ken H]

Stick the wires up and do it properly. If Avanti dont want it, let LNR run it.

 

[cle]

The 805s will see the returns I am sure of it. Bi-modes are perfect for this route.

Ideally it would be wired, and faster than 90mph - but it has countless bridges and the North Wales question would loom. The coast should be wired ideally other than Conwy Valley. Not to mention where else you might want to - given coast trains approach Chester from all over. I would think up to Warrington would be the next one, or to Runcorn (but the upcoming extensions to Shrewsbury/Cardiff complicate this).

 

[The Planner]

Stick the wires up and do it properly. If Avanti dont want it, let LNR run it.

How would LNWR run it? 350 wouldn't fit the Avanti path on the WCML.

 

[dk1]

Always been a secondary route from Euston really. Great to see the hourly service thanks to Voyagers but was always the first to be stood down in times of disruption. Best to just wait for the 805s as nothing much going to happen before then.

 

[Philip]

Stick the wires up and do it properly. If Avanti dont want it, let LNR run it.

I think the best solution of all would be for LNR to order some new bi-mode or hybrid stock and use them on a London Euston-Chester service; basically the existing LNR Crewe semi-fast but extended to Chester. However there don't seem to be any plans for new LNR stock of this kind.
The tunnel under the canal at Christleton is a huge obstacle for the electrification of the Crewe to Chester line.

 

[dk1]

Stick the wires up and do it properly. If Avanti dont want it, let LNR run it.

The pressure has been relieved with bimodes on the way.

 

[JonathanH]

I think the best solution of all would be for LNR to order some new bi-mode or hybrid stock and use them on a London Euston-Chester service; basically the existing LNR Crewe semi-fast but extended to Chester. However there don't seem to be any plans for new LNR stock of this kind.

I can't see funding being made available for that sort of solution, particularly with Avanti's 805s on the way. LNR have new electric units on the way. It is essentially fixing a problem that doesn't exist.

 

[Foxcover]

There doesn’t seem to be any real political interest either - from CWAC (Cheshire West & Chester council), Welsh Assembly or Cheshire MPs - but perhaps not all that surprising.

 

[Western Sunset]

Just wondering, but back in the day (1950s/early 60s) did most folks from Chester use the Euston services to get to London, or did they travel on the ex-GW route to Paddington?

 

[Dr Day]

It hit 5m passengers just before for pandemic

But won't that be mainly local trips, rather than to/from London? It won't always follow that somewhere with a large local market necessarily needs an all-day hourly direct service to London. Not saying that is necessarily the case with Chester, but I'd be interested to see the breakdown of that 5m to understand how relatively important London is compared with say Manchester or Liverpool. Also the promised TfW North Wales recast and frequency enhancements may improve the situation regarding getting to London via Crewe.

 

[cle]

But won't that be mainly local trips, rather than to/from London? It won't always follow that somewhere with a large local market necessarily needs an all-day hourly direct service to London. Not saying that is necessarily the case with Chester, but I'd be interested to see the breakdown of that 5m to understand how relatively important London is compared with say Manchester or Liverpool. Also the promised TfW North Wales recast and frequency enhancements may improve the situation regarding getting to London via Crewe.

I would too. The RUS docs used to publish the London - X annual numbers, would like to know how Chester performed over time as service improved and bedded in.

And how it ranks against other WCML and other mainline city pairs with London - given the hourly service.

 

[Ken H]

How would LNWR run it? 350 wouldn't fit the Avanti path on the WCML.

Extend the london crewe services

 

[The Planner]

Extend the london crewe services

So Chester now gets a much slower service and passengers would get a quicker journey by changing at Crewe.

 

[Bletchleyite]

So Chester now gets a much slower service and passengers would get a quicker journey by changing at Crewe.

Talking of the latter, post HS2 a change at Crewe would be substantially faster. I do wonder if the through service will have any value after that, unless Crewe-Chester is electrified and so a through HS2 service could operate using the spare portion (the other half of which is planned to go to Macclesfield).

Of course speed isn't everything and some will choose a slower through journey, but these will generally be on the lowest fares rather than being particularly remunerative for the railway to justify a dedicated hourly service.

 

[6Gman]

I think the best solution of all would be for LNR to order some new bi-mode or hybrid stock and use them on a London Euston-Chester service; basically the existing LNR Crewe semi-fast but extended to Chester. However there don't seem to be any plans for new LNR stock of this kind.
The tunnel under the canal at Christleton is a huge obstacle for the electrification of the Crewe to Chester line.

No, the best solution would be to reinstate the hourly Chester - Euston with two intermediate stops.

Unless there's some huge unmet demand for travel between Chester and Rugeley/ Atherstone etc.

 

[dk1]

Virgin often referred to the Chester as the second hourly Liverpool service as this was convenient for many living across the Mersey.